This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: It looks like Trump want to explode the deficit

Originally Posted by Lord of Planar

I see you are clueless of how they make legislation.

Only the majority party can allow a vote on the House floor. Only the majority party can bring something up for a vote in Committee. The Democrats were not the majority party in the House from 1995-2007, and weren't in the Senate from 2003-7. So there's nothing they could have done to prevent the bubble from happening.

Re: It looks like Trump want to explode the deficit

Originally Posted by Incisor

Only the majority party can allow a vote on the House floor. Only the majority party can bring something up for a vote in Committee. The Democrats were not the majority party in the House from 1995-2007, and weren't in the Senate from 2003-7. So there's nothing they could have done to prevent the bubble from happening.

True.

However, they have voices which actually convince republicans as well.

The facts do show some republicans wanted to rein in the situation before it stated, and the biggest vocal detractor was Barney Frank.

I don't care how much you guys believe the facts or not. Those are the facts. Besides, since it was profitable for house flipping speculators, nobody was pressuring congress to change what the PC crowd wanted.

The third video I linked several posts back even has Barney Frank saying the bursting bubble was good!

Re: It looks like Trump want to explode the deficit

Originally Posted by Lord of Planar

However, they have voices which actually convince republicans as well.

Come on, really? Did that really happen during the Bush years? I remember a lot of votes done under the cover of late-nights and early mornings in an effort to avoid specifically this very thing. Not that it would have made a difference anyway, Conservatives are party-before-country. Always. If they didn't listen to Democrats when they were warning against invading Iraq, why would they have listened to Democrats when it came to the housing bubble which is the only thing that propped up Bush's economy?

The facts do show some republicans wanted to rein in the situation before it stated, and the biggest vocal detractor was Barney Frank.

What did they want to "reign in"? Because GSE's weren't the ones responsible for the flood of subprimes. Those were done by non-GSE entities. It wasn't until Bush reversed Clinton's 2000 HUD rule that GSE's started buying risky subprimes. To "reign in" the industry, what should have happened was more regulation and oversight of the lending standards for subprimes. But Conservatives opposed that, choosing instead to allow the industry to self-police beginning in 2004 and saying regulation was "low priority". Didn't work out so well, did it?

I don't care how much you guys believe the facts or not. Those are the facts. Besides, since it was profitable for house flipping speculators, nobody was pressuring congress to change what the PC crowd wanted.

It wasn't house-flippers that the mortgage bubble was designed for, nor were they who the bubble benefited. For that, you only need look at the profits banks made off the sales of subprime-backed securities in the secondary mortgage market. That's where the profit was. These lenders knew the subprimes were garbage, even saying so in e-mails.

The third video I linked several posts back even has Barney Frank saying the bursting bubble was good!

Well, I think there's some context in that video you're missing. Frank's talking only about one group in that video, not the industry as a whole. And besides, he's right. Using the housing bubble to increase house-flipping was inevitably going to lead to a collapse.

Re: It looks like Trump want to explode the deficit

Originally Posted by Incisor

Come on, really? Did that really happen during the Bush years? I remember a lot of votes done under the cover of late-nights and early mornings in an effort to avoid specifically this very thing. Not that it would have made a difference anyway, Conservatives are party-before-country. Always. If they didn't listen to Democrats when they were warning against invading Iraq, why would they have listened to Democrats when it came to the housing bubble which is the only thing that propped up Bush's economy?

What did they want to "reign in"? Because GSE's weren't the ones responsible for the flood of subprimes. Those were done by non-GSE entities. It wasn't until Bush reversed Clinton's 2000 HUD rule that GSE's started buying risky subprimes. To "reign in" the industry, what should have happened was more regulation and oversight of the lending standards for subprimes. But Conservatives opposed that, choosing instead to allow the industry to self-police beginning in 2004 and saying regulation was "low priority". Didn't work out so well, did it?

It wasn't house-flippers that the mortgage bubble was designed for, nor were they who the bubble benefited. For that, you only need look at the profits banks made off the sales of subprime-backed securities in the secondary mortgage market. That's where the profit was. These lenders knew the subprimes were garbage, even saying so in e-mails.

Well, I think there's some context in that video you're missing. Frank's talking only about one group in that video, not the industry as a whole. And besides, he's right. Using the housing bubble to increase house-flipping was inevitably going to lead to a collapse.

Re: It looks like Trump want to explode the deficit

Originally Posted by Lord of Planar

Look.
I'm tired of this questioning of things I debated a decade ago.
Apparently, you are too young to remember that timeframe.

Oh, I remember it quite vividly. Time does not heal those wounds. Facts are that Bush took deliberate action in 2003-4 in order to hastily create a housing bubble in time for the 2004 election. Remember, the first four years of the Bush Tax Cuts saw the worst growth since the Great Depression, a loss of 811,000 private sector jobs, and the erasing of a surplus leading to record deficits. Revenue didn't even reach 2000 levels until 2004. That's solely because of the tax cuts. Because the economy was doing so poorly, Bush needed something to make it look like it wasn't and housing is the fastest way to stimulate the economy outside of fiscal stimulus (which Bush tried in 2001 to no avail).

Re: It looks like Trump want to explode the deficit

Originally Posted by Incisor

Oh, I remember it quite vividly. Time does not heal those wounds. Facts are that Bush took deliberate action in 2003-4 in order to hastily create a housing bubble in time for the 2004 election. Remember, the first four years of the Bush Tax Cuts saw the worst growth since the Great Depression, a loss of 811,000 private sector jobs, and the erasing of a surplus leading to record deficits. Revenue didn't even reach 2000 levels until 2004. That's solely because of the tax cuts. Because the economy was doing so poorly, Bush needed something to make it look like it wasn't and housing is the fastest way to stimulate the economy outside of fiscal stimulus (which Bush tried in 2001 to no avail).

Re: It looks like Trump want to explode the deficit

Originally Posted by Lord of Planar

Which leftist pundit site told you that I wonder?

None...it's the most logical conclusion for why Bush took the actions he took in 2003-4. Why else would he make all those moves in housing in that brief period if not to stimulate the middling economy his tax cuts produced?

Re: It looks like Trump want to explode the deficit

Originally Posted by Incisor

None...it's the most logical conclusion for why Bush took the actions he took in 2003-4. Why else would he make all those moves in housing in that brief period if not to stimulate the middling economy his tax cuts produced?